Posted on 02/19/2019 4:46:57 AM PST by JudgemAll
Out of Time
Airbus CEO Tom Enders expressed regrets over the timing of the A380 program, saying, “There has been speculation that we were 10 years too early; I think it is clear that we were 10 years too late.”
But it was closer to four decades too late, or perhaps three decades too soon. There was not enough demand for an aircraft that size by the time the A380 rolled out in 2005, as proven by the aircraft's inability to attract sizeable orders in its brief lifetime. The 747 has lasted five decades and still maintains a sizable share of the very large aircraft market with over 1,500 units built since 1969, more than 500 still flying, and more orders left on the books when you count the freighter version (and you should).
The Airbus A380 netted 313 units sold as of January of this year and had delivered 234. Worse, ten-year-old aircraft leaving service have found no after-market demand and been scrapped for spares.
The end of the jumbo era
The Airbus A380 and Boeing 747 share a common drawback: their size. Smaller aircraft are more appealing to airlines for their operational efficiencies.
But the 747 is still leaner than the A380, and offers more flexible operations with more airports around the world designed to support the aircraft. The 747 was designed to outlast its usefulness for passenger services, from the beginning. It was always imagined as a freighter and has ample room to carry cargo in the hold, even on the passenger version.
(Excerpt) Read more at forbes.com ...
AF1 are very special 747s ... short fuselage, long wings, and oversized engines.
Absolutely...very cool.
Most of my time is at night (It’s gotta be there in the morning), and I was fascinated by what you can see, I remember when my entire DC-3 was covered in St. Elmo’s Fire,picking our way thru Thunder Storm laced weather fronts.
People would say “Oh you have visited a lot of places” I say “Yeah, but all hotels looks the same at 6am”
That airlined was not designed to have a large nose opening for cargo ops like the 747.That glaring design flaw completely put it out the race for Fed Ex types.
***************************************************
Actually it’s the complete opposite. Fedex ordered the A380 early on but because of production delays they canceled the order and ordered Boeing 777’s which they fly today. Fedex isn’t interested in the 747 for several reasons one of which being they don’t need the hinged nose. Fedex is a package carrier and loads via canisters through a side cargo door. Hinged noses are for large bulk cargo that can’t go through a cargo door, Fedex doesn’t carry that stuff. The 747 is also inefficient for carrying canister freight on the upper deck because of the hump, it’s just empty space that you can’t fill the way Fedex loads cargo.
Having some idea of your interests from your posts over the years, I suspect you have already read this book: 747: Creating the World’s First Jumbo Jet and Other Adventures from a Life in Aviation which I (as an aviation enthusiast) found fascinating.
...
That’s an expensive book, but my library has it and I just placed a hold.
I read a while back that Boeing almost sold the rights to the 737 to pay for some of the 747 development costs. I bet they are glad they didn’t.
It’s a bigger win for Airbus. Now they can stop throwing bad money after good.
Boy, you are right there. Look at the 737 today!
You’re going to love that book!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.